Re: TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry to resurrect this thread, but it just occured to me that Bob Ciaffone could probably be classified as a TAG.

And I think he's pretty good, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

If so, then Stuart Ruben must be a LAG?

Personally, I've always thought of NL TAGs as solid preflop with weak-tight tendancies postflop. They make decisions quickly to be done with a hand, and generally shy away from aggression with air. LAGs love em.

Re: TAG
 

This seems to be going nowhere. I don't really get what the problem is. TAG is just a general term that means Tight and Aggressive. It is not like there is only ONE type of TAG player. There could be someone who is Tight and Aggressive and very tough and someone who is Tight and Aggressive and very weak. A tougher player will probably do things like know when to fire multiple barrells, finding good spots to pick up pots, be able to make good calls with weakish hands etc. The weaker player might still be aggressive but be overall very predicatable, folds too often doesn't bluff past the flop and so easy to pick on. There's many shades to this.

So TAG in a description doesn't alway paint a complete picture and may be what Ghaz was getting at.

To Clarify
 

TAG means Tight and Aggressive

LAG means Loose and Aggressive

There are players who play a TAG game and lose.
There are players who play a TAG game and own.

There are players who play a LAG game and lose.
There are players who play a LAG game and own.

I would say that most people who think of themselves as LAG's aren't really LAG's. Just because you raise your suited connector from the button preflop doesn't make you a LAG. Everyone in this particular forum seems to be very caught up on this whole LAG/TAG thing when in reality very few players can play an effective LAG style. Most people that are beating the middle stakes online games are playing a TAG style and it works quite well in these middle limits.

Most people should quit worrying about transforming into a LAG superstar and become a solid TAG player.

Re: To Clarify
 

[ QUOTE ]
Most people should quit worrying about transforming into a LAG superstar and become a solid TAG player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: To Clarify
 

[ QUOTE ]

Most people should quit worrying about transforming into a LAG superstar and become a solid losing player.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

I need the money.

Re: TAG
 

Also, the LAG is a somewhat recent invention as a model for success. Read posts from Ray Zee and some of the old school superstars disparagin LAGgy players as people who run good and think they invented poker, then run bad, freak out and go broke.

Re: TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
This seems to be going nowhere. I don't really get what the problem is. TAG is just a general term that means Tight and Aggressive. It is not like there is only ONE type of TAG player. There could be someone who is Tight and Aggressive and very tough and someone who is Tight and Aggressive and very weak. A tougher player will probably do things like know when to fire multiple barrells, finding good spots to pick up pots, be able to make good calls with weakish hands etc. The weaker player might still be aggressive but be overall very predicatable, folds too often doesn't bluff past the flop and so easy to pick on. There's many shades to this.

So TAG in a description doesn't alway paint a complete picture and may be what Ghaz was getting at.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what I was getting at. When I read a post where the only read is "Villain is TAG" or "my image is TAG", I don't know what that means or how to apply it to the posted hand. People usually elaborate (at least somewhat) on why they think they're in LAG mode or why their opponent is a LAG but never for TAG. I figured I must be missing something that is common knowledge to everyone else.

From the responses, it appears there are many different ideas about what the label "TAG" really means. If we aren't all using the same nomenclature, its quite difficult to talk strategy.